The Henson Journals

[91]

Saturday, June 21st, 1930, Eton.

[symbol]

The oration on 'Church & State', which I have (very foolishly) undertaken to deliver to the E.C.U. in the Albert Hall on July 3rd begins to weigh on my mind. There is considerable curiosity as to what I shall say, & how I shall succeed in propitiating the prejudices of my audience without compromising my principles or confusing my argument. I must decline to assume in them any other character than that of loyal members of the Church of England, and any other conception of that Church than the fundamental conception of it as a spiritual society, a living part of the 'Body of Christ'. It would seem requisite that I should so far define the crucial word, 'spiritual' as to make my use of it intelligible. Then, I must proceed to formulate certain essential franchises which belong to this 'spiritual' society, and to show how these are obscured, or imperilled, or wholly disallowed by the present "Establishment". The ^lesson^ [moral] of my speech – the moral necessity of Disestablishment – will then have become apparent.

[92]

[symbol]

How odd the fortunes of speeches! I had bestowed rather uncommon pains on yesterday's speech: it was well received, & generally approved. My object in it was mainly educative. I designed to get the public mind, and especially the ecclesiastical mind, to move away from the familiar clap–trap of our educational "die–hards", and to compel them to see our obligations in a juster perspective. I think the speech was well calculated to have this effect. This morning's papers for the most part ignore it altogether, & give great prominence to a quite unimportant resolution moved by Athelstan Riley about "Marriage and Divorce". I say 'unimportant', because, though the subject itself is of cardinal importance, his contribution (viz. adoption from the Roman Catholick position) is well–known & quite futile. But "sex–questions" have an unfailing attraction for the public mind, a fact which is neither insignificant nor satisfactory. It may stand with the present rage for nude & 'bathing–dress' photographs especially of women, where the sex appeal is paramount. We are quickly getting rid of whatever survived of reverence, reliance, & refinement.

[93]

[symbol]

I came away from Park Lane after breakfast, and, having deposited my bags in the Club, went in succession to the hairdresser, and the book–seller. In the latter, Mr Wheatley told me that he had seen my portrait in the Academy, and liked it. He preferred it to the adjacent portrait of Abp. Temple. He said that Bernard Shaw had visited Hugh Rees's book–shop recently, & purchased two of Scott's novels. He (Shaw) expressed a great regard for Sir Walter – "He can tell a story: but these younger men can't. If they want to describe a railway–journey, they take half a volume to do so. I could do it in two pages" – There can be no doubt (i.e. I have no doubt) that appreciation of Scott is a very just criterion of literacy appreciation. Yet it is the melancholy truth that the lovers of Sir Walter grow to be few in the land, and are now mostly found among pig–headed and white–haired men. Partly, of course, this is a result of the changed social climate: and partly, a consequence of the new obsession with psycho–analytical problems. But, however explicable, the fact does me judice indicate a decline in the faculty of literary appreciation and a great fall in the ethical temperature.

[94]

I picked up in the Athenaeum, and ran through hastily a small volume, which professes to give a first–hand & trustworthy account of the situation in Russia. It is entitled –

"Moscow Unmasked, a Record of Nine Years' Work & Observation in Soviet Russia by Joseph Douillet, late Belgian consul in Russia: member of Professor F. Nansen's Mission to Russia, etc etc. Translated from the Russian by A. W. King. The Pilot Press. Two Little Essex Street, Strand."

I am particular to note the writer's qualifications, for his description of the situation in Russia is by far the most terrible I have seen. The account of the 'abandoned children', of whom he says that there are no fewer than 5,000,000 in Russia is almost incredible. And yet, given the conditions deliberately created by the Soviet Government, it seems almost inevitable. The writer gives his own experience of the Russian prisons which was dreadful enough to 'drive a wise man mad': and he is clearly obsessed with the belief that the Russian Communists are engineering a world–catastrophe of the most appalling character.

[95]

I spent the morning in the Club, lunched there with Athelstan Riley, and came away to Eton in the afternoon. The view of the Castle was magnificent.

When I arrived at the Headmaster's House, I found that he and his wife had gone to London to attend the Jubilee celebration of the School Mission in Hackney Wick. So I went to my room, & wrote a "Collins" to Lady Scarbrough.

There came to dinner, the Provost and one of the masters. Monty James told me in the course of conversation that he had been born in 1862, so that he is a year older than I. He is evidently much pleased with the O.M., and at having been invested with it privately, & so relieved from the necessity of a journey to London. We conversed until nearly 11 p.m., but I can recall nothing worthy of remembrance. Whose fault was it? Alington is, perhaps, a little shy of me on account of Disestablishment: and on that issue he has drawn closer to Inge, whose attitude towards me is neither generous nor even equitable.

---